Boerboel

ORIGINAL: Scout in Canada

Espence, mrv was replying to AwsomeDog's post about a DA rottie. See above.

ORIGINAL: espencer

ORIGINAL: Scout in Canada

Espence, mrv was replying to AwsomeDog's post about a DA rottie. See above.

Ups i fixed it already []

ORIGINAL: mrv

In such a case, I would suggest that a multiple phase approach would be best.  A training activity in which obedience commands are emphasised so a new default behavior is in place.  Distraction training with dogs at a distance in safe situations (barriers between animals).  In this phase the breaking of eye contact would be one facet, as would redirection to the default behaviors.  Keeping the dog in motion and focused on intereaction with the handler.  As the training progresses, different variables would be systematically changed to promote the generalization of the behavior across environments.

I do not work with serious aggression cases.  I refer those out.

I do work with reactive and what are perceived as agressive dogs in a class setting.  I have been teaching public obedience classes for 15 years and typically, I get the hard dogs.

As to my qualifications, I am trained as a behaviorist... I use the principles daily in my work... I work in schools.  I see some of the same arguments in that setting about techniques that occur on the board.

ORIGINAL: Scout in Canada

It is a common problem that people misinterpret what positive reinforcement is. It is not a treat, or a toy, or a pet, or praise in an of itself. It is only positive based on the impact it has on behavior.

Absolutely - both you and mrv have stated what is, to +R trainers, the obvious. 

So true. It's not positive reinforcement if it's not working. People often say "+R doesn't work for my dog because there are more interesting things to him than the treat I'm holding". Than you're not doing +R! Pick a reward that does impact their behavior. I think Ed uses squirrel-chasing or some variant of that as a reward for his dogs. They are drivey, they love chasing prey, and that can be used in exchange for the behavior he wants. Sorry Ed if I'm confused there or thinking of someone else. I'm pretty sure you had mentioned that at some point.

Sometimes, we have to work pretty hard to find the reinforcer (I like that word so much better than "treat" []), but the object for the trainer is to find a reinforcer that the dog perceives as valuable, so I'm with Ed - use the squirrels if that's what it takes. []

ORIGINAL: mrv

It is apparent to me that you do not wish to debate,,,so be it.   If you would reread my posts, you will see that I have not called myself a certified animal behaviorist.  I said I was trained in applied behavior analysis.

I have seen the techniques done and in a class situation there is no safe and appropriate way in which to deal with a truly dog aggressive dog

so yes I take the responsible course and refer them out.  I fail to see what is so wrong about that.

I fail to see how the use of a proven technology in multiple venues where behavior change is the desired outcome would be cause for such a set of negative comments.

ORIGINAL: pndhounds

Many moons ago, a poster, named Sunny, offered dilligent and specific training advice to me how best to deal with my fearful, reactive Gypsy.  I will always be grateful for the assistance given.  Over time, however, Sunny's contributions suffered because her delivery and discourse  began to drown  any pertinent and relevant information she was sharing because it became impolite. Such a shame, too. I am afraid, Awsome Dog, you can hardly be heard, but only felt, when you continue to poke a "cyber" finger into the chests of other members in your zest and zeal to be heard....or even understood.

back to topic...as they say

ORIGINAL: luvmyswissy

His own website for his soley owned business "the psycology center" labels him as a dog behavior specialist.  Behavior-list, hello awsomedog - same thing!